Search a number
-
+
201023310232369 is a prime number
BaseRepresentation
bin101101101101010001100010…
…111111110111101100110001
3222100202122022010100222110001
4231231101202333313230301
5202322031214404413434
61551312500035110001
760225312011630632
oct5555214277675461
9870678263328401
10201023310232369
1159063563a60899
121a6677b7a42301
138822555987c11
14378d819c33889
151839126e96114
hexb6d462ff7b31

201023310232369 has 2 divisors, whose sum is σ = 201023310232370. Its totient is φ = 201023310232368.

The previous prime is 201023310232313. The next prime is 201023310232399. The reversal of 201023310232369 is 963232013320102.

It is a strong prime.

It can be written as a sum of positive squares in only one way, i.e., 200556154386225 + 467155846144 = 14161785^2 + 683488^2 .

It is a cyclic number.

It is not a de Polignac number, because 201023310232369 - 223 = 201023301843761 is a prime.

It is a super-2 number, since 2×2010233102323692 (a number of 29 digits) contains 22 as substring.

It is not a weakly prime, because it can be changed into another prime (201023310232399) by changing a digit.

It is a pernicious number, because its binary representation contains a prime number (29) of ones.

It is a polite number, since it can be written as a sum of consecutive naturals, namely, 100511655116184 + 100511655116185.

It is an arithmetic number, because the mean of its divisors is an integer number (100511655116185).

Almost surely, 2201023310232369 is an apocalyptic number.

It is an amenable number.

201023310232369 is a deficient number, since it is larger than the sum of its proper divisors (1).

201023310232369 is an equidigital number, since it uses as much as digits as its factorization.

201023310232369 is an odious number, because the sum of its binary digits is odd.

The product of its (nonzero) digits is 69984, while the sum is 37.

The spelling of 201023310232369 in words is "two hundred one trillion, twenty-three billion, three hundred ten million, two hundred thirty-two thousand, three hundred sixty-nine".